Posts by reelfernandes

Some deviate from envato’s guidelines and judge by personal preference, others feel threatened & practice anti-competitive bias, others do a great job and provide professional feedback if there is a real conflict with envato’s guidelines. They’re human afterall.

Thanks Tsafi. We’re just using the Feedback forum to give our feedback to Envato. We value the reviewers notes about our products, and want to provide customers with the best products we can develop. Teaching customers how to use Flash Professional, or Flash Builder, or FDT , or all of them combined just seems outside the scope of our ability. There are a ton of great educational resources on the internet, and in schools. We, and the customers, are better off by focusing on creating great products, with working examples, and documentation about how to use them effectively.

We’ve seen several requests from Envato to document our source-files beyond providing examples, and workflow documentation.

Please improve the documentation “Help.pdf” to provide more details about setting up library code (tweenlite.swc, etc…). Most customers do not have much experience in setting up these libraries.

We are not an educational company. It is not our responsibility to teach customers how to learn Flash Professional, Flash Builder, or any of the tools required to compile source.

What should we do, link to the Flash Professional, or Flash Builder, or FDT manual, or all of them? We cannot be responsible for the customer’s knowledge level. Adobe does a good enough job documenting how to use their tools. Additionally a customer may be using another IDE to edit source-files.

We provide ready-to-use software. Due to Envato’s source requirements we do not sell all of our productions through Envato. But we do include source in a few products, however we have no interested in documenting anything beyond working examples, and tools required to publish source. We cannot foresee and address every aspect of a project that may not be within a customers skill-set.

Please mandate a clear set of rules for your reviewers to adhere to, and do not allow reviewers to review outside of them.

Comically we’ve now been rejected 8 times by the same reviewer, each time with a completely new & minor reason. Some reasons-for-rejection we couldn’t find documented in the activeden submission guide.

Yes, this reviewer should list all of his spurious reasons in one submission rejection… but the real interesting mention is that this author has a project on activeden that directly competes with our submission, it just happens to be much worse.

Opinion aside, and ignoring the ethical failure of authors being reviewed by competitors, we decided to download his work in the spirit of comparison. Immediately we found several of the things we were rejected over in his own project. If it wasn’t so outrageously hypocritical, and anti-competitive behavior, we’d be laughing our heads off.

Is this typical of activeden, or what? It’s been a strong turn off, and we’re on the fence about whether we want to do any business here if it’s status quo. Sorry to sound bitter, or incredulous, but we’re really surprised, and expected a higher degree of integrity.

It’s gotten to the point that we’re questioning the validity of reviewers reviewing their own competition. We have made small nonsensical tweaks in response to several rejections now by the same reviewer, and after each resubmission he finds yet another small nag.

If one is given a reason upon rejection, and you fix that reason, you would think that means you’ll be ok. However, we are on our fifth or sixth submission, many from the same exact reviewer, and new reasons for rejection seem to keep cropping up. Many have felt dishonest, as if the reviewer is scrambling to invent a reason for rejection.

Aren’t the reviewers reviewing their own competition? I looked up one, and discovered that he has worse content than mine in the same area.

Reviews are terribly inconsistent, and often feel subject to the reviewers personal mood at the time imo. We’ve seen the same file rejected for a reason as simple as “The comments weren’t done as we prefer”, and after fixing the comments as the activeden reviewer prefers, it’s rejected for something else rather silly.

We’re beginning to question the motives of some of the reviewers, since they are often reviewing their own competition…